Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 686.130 (2026)

“Unprofessional or dishonorable conduct” defined

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      686.130 “Unprofessional or dishonorable conduct” defined. “Unprofessional or dishonorable conduct,” as used in this chapter, includes:

      (1) The fraudulent use or misuse of any health certificate, shipping certificate, brand inspection certificate, or other blank forms used in practice, that might lead to the dissemination of disease or the transportation of diseased animals or the sale of inedible food products of animal origin for human consumption.

      (2) Dilatory methods, willful neglect or misrepresentation in the inspection of meat.

      (3) Misrepresentation of services rendered.

      (4) Failure to report, or the negligent handling of the serious epidemic diseases of animals, such as anthrax, rabies, glanders, brucellosis, tuberculosis, foot and mouth disease, hog cholera, blackleg, and any other communicable disease known to medical science as being a menace to human and animal health.

      (5) The dispensing or giving to anyone live culture or attenuated live virus vaccine to be administered by a layperson without providing instruction as to its administration and use and without prior written authorization from the State Veterinarian when such product is declared to be prohibited under ORS 596.075.

      (6) Having professional connection with, or lending one’s name to any illegal practitioner of veterinary medicine and the various branches thereof.

      (7) Impairment as defined in ORS 676.303.

      (8) Fraud or dishonesty in applying or reporting on any test for disease in animals.

      (9) False or misleading advertising.

      (10) Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude or conviction of a felony. The record of the conviction is conclusive evidence.

      (11) Conviction of a charge of cruelty to animals in Oregon or any other state, county, or municipal court. The record of conviction is conclusive evidence.

      (12) The revocation, suspension or refusal to issue or renew a license or practice credential to practice veterinary medicine in any other state, territory or foreign jurisdiction if the cause of that revocation, suspension or refusal to issue or renew is cause in this state. The record of revocation, suspension or refusal to issue or renew is conclusive evidence.

      (13) Failure to keep one’s premises and equipment therein in a clean and sanitary condition.

      (14) Gross ignorance, incompetence or inefficiency in the profession. In determining what constitutes “gross ignorance, incompetence or inefficiency in the profession,” the Oregon State Veterinary Medical Examining Board may take into account all relevant factors, and practices, including but not limited to the practices generally and currently followed and accepted by the persons licensed to practice veterinary medicine in this state, the current teaching at accredited veterinary schools, relevant technical reports published in recognized veterinary medical journals and the desirability of reasonable experimentation in the furtherance of the veterinary medicine arts.

      (15) Permitting the veterinary technician, preceptee, or student intern to perform a duty, task or procedure not specifically permitted by the board. [Amended by 1975 c.619 §5; 1979 c.744 §57; 1993 c.491 §7; 2009 c.756 §60]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1975–2016 · leading case: Genova v. Oregon Veterinary Med. Examining Bd., 386 P.3d 40 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Genova v. Oregon Veterinary Med. Examining Bd., 386 P.3d 40 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 13× “120 1 and ORS 686.130, 2 and, as a sanction, ordered him to pay a $750 penalty and $5,594.”
Eastep v. Veterinary Med. Examining Bd., 539 P.2d 1144 (Or. Ct. App. 1975). “He was charged with violation of ORS 686.130(3), which he denied. Following notice and hearing before an examiner, the latter entered findings of fact and conclusions of law holding that petitioner’s actions “constituted unprofessional conduct by his misrepresentation of…”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 686.130(3): 1 case
Eastep v. Veterinary Med. Examining Bd., 539 P.2d 1144 (Or. Ct. App. 1975). “He was charged with violation of ORS 686.130(3), which he denied. Following notice and hearing before an examiner, the latter entered findings of fact and conclusions of law holding that petitioner’s actions “constituted unprofessional conduct by his misrepresentation of…”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 686.130(6): 1 case
Genova v. Oregon Veterinary Med. Examining Bd., 386 P.3d 40 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). “120 1 and ORS 686.130, 2 and, as a sanction, ordered him to pay a $750 penalty and $5,594.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.